Etan-main text

Science policies in the European Union
Grimy, Squishy and Slimy – ‘support girls at an early age’
The discussion on the hurdles facing women in graduate studies and the working
world, while balancing the social demands of womanhood are interesting. As a
practising civil engineer and mother of four I struggle with them myself, however the
problem begins earlier.
We need to do more to encourage girls’ curiosity and mechanical skills. They can’t be
discouraged to explore things that are grimy, squishy or slimy. These later become
fields of mechanics, chemistry and biology. We must do more to keep our daughters
fascinated with exploring how our world works. We also need to prepare them for the
realities of the adult world. I’ve seen many young, female engineers discouraged by the
rudeness of their male counterparts — of course it wouldn’t hurt to teach our sons
to be polite — and by the blatant impact of funding and politics on the avenues
available for pursuing their dreams. If they love learning about their chosen field, they’ll
be willing to endure the struggles to keep working in it.
Deborah Lenceski (from the Nature web site)
http://helix.nature.com/debates/women/
Role models and mentoring
Women scientists can become exhausted role models but there is no doubt
that they can be effective in combating stereotypes.  The strength of
stereotypes is extraordinary.  There are examples from many Member States
of women giving their time to visit schools and give talks to encourage girls
into science.  It is increasingly recognised that promoting the public
understanding of science should be an integral part of the job that scientists
do, for which they are rewarded.  So too, work as a role model to attract
girls and indeed women returners to science should ideally be recognised as
an essential component of the work package of women scientists for those
who chose to do it, rather than as an additional ‘leisure time activity’.
Equally mentoring work is vital to prevent women students feeling isolated.
Mentoring can be helpful to build up contacts with professionals, to
understand better the culture, how it works and how to challenge it if need
be, for psychological support and so on.  Mentoring was advocated in the
influential Hilden 11-point action plan for promoting women and
excellence in science in Denmark (Ministry of Research and Information
Technology, 1994).  Professional associations and women in science
networks can be asked to provide role models for schools, speaking
platforms, media appearances and so on (see Tibazarwa and Colosimo, 1999
for a list of women in science networks).
In France, girls now constitute over a third of students in scientific
disciplines in the universities (36%).  However, apart from biological
sciences, the proportion among students following the elite scientific path
(described in Chapter 5) only amounts to between 15 and 30%.  This path
attracts the best students in science although it leads many of them to a
non-scientific career.  On the other hand, mentoring in Ecoles is much more
efficient than in the universities, and it has proved to be useful to push girls
whose only ambition is to be secondary teachers, into research careers.
Positive action education measures
There has been a raft of positive action measures designed to attract girls
into science and technology, including booklets, roadshows, travelling
exhibitions (such as the WISE bus in the UK), science days at universities
and so on, but they cannot be said to have been particularly effective.  This
A chemical engineer was
appearing as a role model at a
Women’s Training  Roadshow  for
2,000 schoolgirls in Wales, UK.
The first three groups of girls
all asked her the same question:
‘Are you really an engineer?’
‘Yes’ she said, exasperated,
‘Why do you ask?’ There was a
pause.
‘Because you’ve got a handbag’,
one of them replied.
(Rees, 1992)
‘Young people, especially girls,
are very sensitive to how
something looks… Therefore it is
important to have more physics
teachers looking like the Spice
Girls’
Susan Greenfield, Professor of Synaptic
Pharmacology at Oxford University
quoted in The Guardian, 29/6/99
62

---

is not surprising: on the whole they are one-off, ‘stand alone’ measures and
are unable to change the wider cultural context in which they are located.
So, while such initiatives are to be welcomed, they need to be part of a
broader strategic approach.
In Chapter 3, we identified some special fellowships designed exclusively or
particularly for women.  Some of these are fellowships earmarked for
women returners.  In Germany, the special funding programmes in support
of higher education and research (HSP) discussed elsewhere in this report as
a rare example of mainstreaming gender equality in science policy, includes
support for re-entry training for women with child-care supplements.  This
integration of positive action measures within a broader mainstreaming
agenda is far more likely to bear fruit.
Is there a ‘female style ‘ in science?
The issue of ‘women in science’ has moved on from a concern with access
and equal opportunities to a concern with the role of gender in ‘doing’
science.  Do women do science differently from men?  In 1993, the journal
Science dedicated a special issue to the question ‘Is there a “Female style” in
Science?’ (16 April, 1993).  The topic was taken up in the Scientific American
in an article ‘A Lab of her Own’, by Margaret Holloway in the same year.
This is a theoretical question, answered in three different ways.  For one
group, science is an objective, disinterested activity far from personal input.
Any style, and especially a ‘female’ style, therefore, is an unheard of heresy.
For a second group, femininity is so essential that any activity undertaken by
women bears the stamp of gender.  For them, a female style, even in science,
is inevitable for women doing science. Some feminist scholars try to avoid
the either-or choice between Scylla (belief in total objectivity / identity
between men and women) and Charibdis (belief in partiality and essential
difference between men and women).  They argue that all science is
contextual and situated in time, which does not so much relativise
objectivity, but localises knowledge.
However, where women have changed science, it is not so much a result of
their female upbringing as of the development of gender awareness through
women's studies and gender studies. In the last two decades, women
scientists and scholars have criticised scientific concepts, methods and
methodologies for their unrecognised gender dimensions. They have
produced research on women, gender and science which addresses the ways
in which:
•
science produces definitions of gender through research by over- or
under- emphasising gender differences.
•
science and scientific methods are gendered in terms of binary
opposition such as object- subjectivity, nature- culture, body and mind.
(Bosch, 1999).
Educating scientists, desterotyping science
When a woman was appointed
to the Board of the University
of Utrecht, she had to be
presented to the City Council.
‘May I please introduce you to
our new council member?’ the
Rector asked one of the city
councillors.  Thereupon the
addressed looked left and right
and straight past the new
woman member, and then asked:
“Where?”
Opzij, 30/9/1999
63

---